ND62T2 - A new mind free from the past and authority
New Delhi - 24 January 1962
Public Talk 2
Audio without subtitles on YouTube. Instead, the transcript from kfoundation.org is used.
Text-only version
|
0:10
We were
saying
the
last
time
when
we met
here
-
it was
on
Sunday
-
how
important
it is
that
there
should
be
a
total
revolution
-
not
reformation,
not
the
reforming
of
society,
but
a
complete
inward
revolution
of
the
mind.
We said
that
a
new
mind
is
necessary
to
meet
not
only
the
present
crisis
which
is
always
expanding
and
growing
worse,
but
a
new
mind
is
necessary
also
to
discover
for
ourselves
what
is
true
and
if
there is
a
state
of
creativity
beyond
time.
For
that
a
new
mind
is
necessary,
a
new
mind
that
is
not
a
slave
to
obedience
to
authority,
that
comprehends
totally
that
state
of
humility
in
which
alone
there
can
be
learning.
|
|
1:55
And
as
I
said
last
Sunday,
is
it possible
for
the
individual
to
break
away
from
society?
It is
only
in
breaking
away
from
society
that
the
individual
comes
into
existence.
And
is
it possible
for
that
individual
to
bring
about
a
new
mind?
We said
that
society
is
the
past,
and
each
one
of
us
is
the
result
of
the
past.
Each
one
of
us
is
the
result
of
his
environment,
of
the
society
he
lives
in,
of
the
culture
in
which
he
has
been
brought
up,
of
the
religious
propaganda
with
which
he
has
been
inculcated
through
centuries.
3:13
He
is
the
result
of
all
that
which
is
the
past.
Is
it possible
to
break
away
from
the
past
totally,
the
past
being
not
only
yesterday
but
the
many
thousand
yesterdays,
the
past
which
is
the
atomic
bomb
as
well
as
the
tradition
of
the
Hindu,
the
Christian,
the
Buddhist,
or
of
all
the
other
religions,
or
of
the
social
revolutionary
who
is
the
Communist?
|
|
4:02
The
past
is
not
only
the
tradition
but
also
the
result
of
that
tradition
in
conjunction
with
the
present
which
creates
the
future.
Because
for
most
of
us
tradition
is
very
important,
we have
to
understand
tradition.
There is
the
tradition
of
the
weaver,
there is
the
tradition
of
the
scientist,
there is
the
tradition
of
the
scholar,
there is
the
tradition
of
the
so-called
religious
person,
the
tradition
of
the
technician.
Where
is
one
to
draw
the
line
between
the
various
kinds
of
tradition,
and
then
is
technical
knowledge
essential
to
live
in
this
world
and
when
is
it a total
detriment
to
the
creative
mind?
|
|
5:26
I think
each
one
of
us
should
comprehend
this
problem
of
tradition,
because
tradition
is
after
all
habit seasoned
in
time.
And
that
habit shapes
our
thought,
shapes
all
our
existence,
forces
you to
go
to
the
office,
forces
you to
maintain
a
family
which
evokes
responsibility,
duty
and
morality
in
which
is
included
obedience.
All
these
are
surely
tradition:
they
compose
tradition,
they
make
up
tradition.
|
|
6:58
Does
tradition
help
to
bring
about
a
creative
mind
that
is
the
new
mind?
Or
does
habit prevent
the
total
comprehension
of
that
which
is
beyond
time?
There is
no
good
habit and
bad
habit
-
all
habit is
the
same.
But
to
free
the
mind
from
habit is,
surely,
extraordinarily
important,
because
habit is
merely
a
technique,
an
easy
way
of
living
in
which
no
deep
thinking
is
necessary.
That
is
why
most
of
us
cultivate
habits
which
become
almost
automatic,
and
thereby
we need
not
exert
too
much
vitality
or
thought.
8:10
So
we cultivate
habits
which
gradually,
through
time,
become
tradition.
|
|
8:20
Now,
the
whole
of
that
is
the
past,
the
past
including
the
ideas,
the
gods,
the
various
conscious
and
unconscious
influences,
the
various
compulsions
and
urges,
the
various
accumulations
to
which
we are
attached.
All
that
is
the
past,
not
only
the
accumulated
memories
of
the
individual,
of
the
person,
but
also
the
accumulated
knowledge
of
humanity
which
has
been
gathered,
accumulated
through
centuries.
There is
the
accumulation
in
the
unconscious
and
there is
the
accumulation
in
the
conscious.
The
accumulation
in
the
conscious
is
the
present
technological
education,
the
environmental
and
social
influences
in
the
present.
9:53
There is
also
in
the
unconscious
the
residue
of
thousands
of
years
of
man's
endeavour,
his
knowledge,
his
hopes,
his
frustrations,
his
unexpected
demands.
All
that
is
the
past.
The
past
is
you,
and
there is
nothing
else
but
the
past.
And
I
think
it is
very
important
to
understand
this.
|
|
10:33
I mean
by
understanding,
not
intellectually,
not
verbally.
If
you merely
assent
to
what
has
been
said,
agree
or
disagree
and
add
more
in
detail
to
what
has
been
said,
verbally,
intellectually,
then
you are
not
understanding,
because
anybody
can
agree
with
anything
or
can
be
persuaded
not
to
agree.
But
understanding
is
something
entirely
different,
surely.
Understanding
comes
into
being
when
you give
your
whole
attention
not
only
to
the
word
and
to
the
meaning
of
the
word,
but
also
to
your
reaction
to
those
words
and
the
reaction
which
is
the
response
of
your
memory
which
is
the
past;
the
whole
total
process
of
that
brings
about
understanding.
|
|
11:59
And
these
talks
are
not
verbal,
are
not
meant
to
be
merely
a
series
of
ideas
with
which
you can
play.
They
are
meant
for
those
people
who
are
serious,
earnest,
who
are
willing
or
wishing
to
go
to
the
very
end
to
find
out
-
to
the
very
end,
not
to
the
intellectual
barren
end
of
words
and
theories,
but
to
the
very
end
of
an
idea,
of
a
thought
like
the
past
-
to
enquire
very
deeply
into
it,
and
to
pursue
it logically,
sanely,
rationally
to
the
very
end.
Such
a
person
is
a
serious
person
who
will
not
be
thwarted
by
any
formula.
|
|
13:15
And
this
evening
we are
proposing
to
do
that;
and
that
is
not
only
to
enquire
verbally,
but
also
emotionally
contact
with
the
word.
You know,
there is
a
difference
between
these
two.
Mere
verbalization
is
not
connected
with
our
emotions,
with
our
feelings;
there is
a
division
between
the
idea
and
the
feeling
which
brings
about
action.
When
we divide
the
idea,
we separate
it from
the
feeling;
then
there is
the
contradiction
between
the
feeling
and
the
idea.
And
most
of
us
spend
our
time
in
trying
to
find
out
how
to
bridge
the
gap
between
the
idea
and
the
action.
14:34
The
idea
is
merely
the
word,
the
idea
is
merely
a
series
of
thoughts
verbalized.
Ideas
have
no
value
at
all.
As
you must
have
observed,
every
politician
throughout
the
world
talks
of
peace.
That
is
double
talk.
They
talk
of
peace
and
prepare
for
war.
They
talk
of
not
having
position,
power,
prestige,
they
are
craving,
burning
after
it.
So
it is
an
idea.
But
we are
not
dealing
with
ideas;
we are
dealing
with
the
fact
that
action
can
only
come
about
when
there is
an
emotional
contact
with
the
fact.
|
|
15:43
I feel
that
the
past
can
be
completely
dissolved.
The
future,
the
unknown,
is
just
beyond
the
wall
of
the
past.
But
to
go
beyond,
to
break
through
that
wall,
one
has
to
go
very
deeply
into
the
question
of
the
past.
One
cannot
go
deeply
into
the
whole
process
of
consciousness
verbally.
One
cannot
enquire
through
thought.
Thought
is
not
capable
of
enquiry,
because
thought
is
born
of
reaction.
Thought
is
the
reaction
of
memory,
and
memory
is
the
result
of
experience;
and
that
experience
is
the
conditioning
in
which
we have
been
brought
up.
17:24
So
thought
is
not
the
way
to
enquire,
thought
is
not
the
instrument
of
questioning,
of
demanding.
|
|
17:42
So,
when
one
realizes
very
clearly,
sharply,
that
thought
is
not
the
instrument
of
enquiry,
then
how
is
one
to
enquire,
how
is
one
to
understand?
As
I
am
talking,
please
listen
to
find
out
the
state
of
your
own
mind.
Do
not
merely
hear
the
words,
but
use
the
words
to
open
the
door
into
your
own
mind.
Because,
really,
what
we are
doing
this
evening
is
the
process
which
opens
the
door
into
yourself.
We are
taking
a
pilgrimage
inwardly,
taking
a
journey
together
into
the
whole
process
of
the
mind.
19:12
If
you are
merely
listening
to
words
then
it will
have
no
value.
But
if
you are
journeying
together
-
not
merely
listening
to
me,
but
journeying
together
with
me
-
then
you will
discover
for
yourself
the
truth
or
falseness
of
what
is
being
said.
|
|
19:44
And
if
the
intellect
is
not
the
instrument
of
enquiry
and
the
intellect
is
not
the
way
that
opens
the
door,
then
what
is
the
way?
I
am
using
the
word
`way'
not
as
a
method,
not
as
a
system,
not
as
a
practice,
not
as
a
discipline
-
those
are
all
too
immature
and
childish;
it does
not
matter
who
says
so.
A
mind
that
follows
a
system
is
a
narrow
mind,
it is
a
limited
mind.
And
a
mind
that
is
disciplined,
shaped,
controlled,
ceases
to
think.
So
I
am
using
the
word
`way'
in
the
sense
if
this
is
not
it,
then
what
is?
20:56
If
thought
is
not
the
way
to
enquire
into
how
to
dissolve
the
past
-
because
thought
itself
is
the
past,
is
the
result
of
the
past;
and
therefore
it is
incapable
of
dissolving
the
past,
then
what
is?
How
is
the
past
to
be
dissolved?
I
hope
I
am
making
myself
perfectly
clear.
|
|
21:36
The
hand
that
gives
cannot
at
the
same
time
take
away.
Thought
wants
to
dissolve
the
past,
but
yet
thought
is
the
result
of
the
past.
No
action,
no
projection,
no
desire,
no
volition
from
the
past
can
dissolve
it,
because
all
that
is
still
of
the
past.
Do
what
you will,
every
action,
every
sacrifice,
every
movement
of
the
mind
is
of
the
past;
and
thought,
do
what
it will,
cannot
resolve
it.
If
this
is
very
clear,
not
merely
in
agreement
-
not
merely
that
you agree
with
what
is
being
said,
which
is
not
important
at
all
-
then
what
is
important
is
to
find
out
if
you can
dissolve
the
past.
23:02
The
past
can
give
the
technique
of
daily
existence,
the
past
is
the
machinery
of
daily
existence;
it can
offer,
it can
facilitate,
but
it cannot
take
you very
far.
And
we have
to
take
a
journey
beyond
the
past,
beyond
time;
and
it is
necessary
because
the
only
revolution
that
matters
is
the
religious
revolution.
And
such
a
revolution
only
can
bring
about
an
extraordinary
order
out
of
this
disorder.
I
will
explain
that
presently.
It is
not
a
contradiction.
|
|
24:12
So,
thought
under
no
circumstances
offers
a
way
out
of
the
past.
The
past
is
necessary;
otherwise
you would
not
know
where
you live,
you would
not
be
able
to
know
what
your
name
is,
or
to
go
to
the
office,
or
to
recognize
your
wife,
husband,
your
friends,
your
children,
or
to
speak.
The
past
is
memory,
and
memory
is
essential.
You cannot
put
it aside.
But
the
cultivation
of
memory
which
is
knowledge,
which
is
the
expansion
of
thought,
cannot
possibly
break
down
the
wall
of
the
past.
And
therefore
the
mind
is
never
new,
never
fresh,
never
young,
never
innocent.
25:24
But
it is
only
such
a
young,
fresh,
innocent
mind
that
knows
humility
-
not
the
mind
that
is
burdened
with
the
past.
|
|
25:42
So
how
is
one
to
break
through
the
past?
There is
an
act
which
comes
into
being
with
seeing.
Please
pay
a
little
attention
to
what
is
being
said.
Because
of
its
very
simplicity
you will
find
it difficult
to
understand;
our
minds
are
so
complicated,
so
immature,
with
a
lot
of
information
which
has
no
value,
so
frightening,
so
insecure.
Being
insecure,
the
mind
seeks
security,
and
therefore
furthers,
insecurity;
and
such
a
mind
is
incapable
of
seeing
something
very
simple
and
therefore
acting
very
simply.
simply.
|
|
27:05
And
I
am
going
to
talk
a
little
bit about
the
act
of
seeing,
which
like
listening
is
an
extraordinary
act.
To
listen
without
judgment,
without
thought,
without
the
word,
without
interpretation,
without
condemning
or
accepting;
just
to
listen,
which
is
an
extremely
attentive
state
of
mind;
to
listen
to
somebody,
it does
not
matter
who
it is,
whether
it is
your
child,
your
husband,
your
boss,
your
bus-conductor;
to
listen
completely
-
it requires
a
great
deal
of
attention,
not
concentration
but
just
attention.
28:23
And
seeing
and
listening
involve
this
attention.
There is
the
past
which
nobody
can
deny.
It is
there,
solid,
brutalizing,
crippling,
destroying
the
young
mind
that
must
be
totally
alive.
That
is
a
fact
-
not
only
an
outward
fact,
but
also
a
psychological
fact.
One
must
see
the
fact
without
condemnation,
without
any
judgment
-
merely
see
the
fact,
what
the
past
is.
|
|
29:46
Now,
let
me
go
into
the
question
of
seeing,
in
a
different
way.
For
most
of
us
authority
is
very
important
-
the
authority
of
the
books,
the
so-called
sacred
books;
the
authority
of
the
policeman,
the
law;
the
authority
of
the
boss,
the
tradition;
authority
as
domination
of
the
husband
over
the
wife
or
the
wife
over
the
husband
and
of
the
parent
over
the
child;
the
authority
that
makes
you obey;
the
authority
that
has
created
such
disorder
in
this
world.
For
through
obedience
you do
not
create
order,
but
you bring
disorder
as
all
tyrannies
do
bring
disorder.
31:01
This
again
is
a
fact,
both
an
outward
and
an
inward
fact,
that
you obey.
And
your
constant
demand
is
to
find
an
assuring,
comforting,
enduring
authority
that
will
give
you great,
immense
satisfaction
which
you call
peace.
|
|
31:33
Do
please
listen
to
this
and
apply
it to
yourself.
You are
not
listening
to
words,
you are
listening
to
yourself.
You are
not
listening
to
ideas,
you are
observing
yourself
in
a
mirror.
You may
turn
your
back,
you may
not
look
at
the
mirror;
but
it is
there
if
you look,
if
you want
it.
As
you are
here,
do
look
at
the
mirror
which
is
yourself.
So
there is
authority
-
the
authority
that
makes
you do
things,
the
authority
of
right
conduct,
the
authority
that
says
that
you must
not
and
that
you must,
the
authority
that
destroys
all
creativity
-
which
is
shown
in
the
soldier.
32:46
The
soldier
is
not
allowed
to
think.
He
is
only
allowed
to
obey.
The
more
completely
he
obeys
the
authority
without
hesitation,
the
more
is
he
the
complete
soldier.
Then
for
him
he
has
no
responsibility,
his
superiors
take
the
responsibility,
and
that
is
why
war
is
popular.
That
is
what
most
of
us
want:
the
authority
of
the
guru
who
tells
you what
to
do
-
and
you don't
have
to
think,
you don't
have
to
feel,
you don't
have
to
question;
you just
follow.
|
|
33:38
And
so
obedience
becomes
almost
second
nature.
And
a
nation
brought
up
on
obedience
is
a
nation
that
ceases
to
be.
That
is
what
is
happening
in
this
unfortunate
country.
There is
no
questioning,
you don't
break
down
authority
-
I
do
not
mean
the
authority
of
the
Government
and
the
authority
of
the
law.
If
you do
break
that
down,
if
you do
not
pay
taxes,
you will
go
to
prison;
that
is
very
simple
I
don't
mean
breaking
down
that
kind
of
authority;
that
will
be
too
stupid
and
immature.
When
I
speak
of
breaking
down
authority,
I
mean
the
breaking
down
of
the
psychological
authority,
the
authority
that
one
has
built
up
within
oneself,
which
is
to
obey
-
to
obey
the
guru,
to
obey
tradition,
to
obey
what
you have
been
told,
to
bend
your
knee
to
the
so-called
religion
which
is
nothing
else
but
propaganda.
35:09
We will
go
into
the
whole
question
of
religion
later.
So
authority
cripples
all
that
and
brings
about
deterioration;
you are
never
free,
there is
always
fear.
|
|
35:39
And
how
can
a
mind
which
is
ridden
by
authority
of
every
kind,
from
the
little
authority
to
the
great
authority
of
the
highest
guru,
Sankara
and
all
the
saints
-
how
can
such
a
mind
ever
find
out
what
is
true
for
itself?
Surely,
it has
to
find
out
what
is
true
for
itself.
It need
not
be
told
by
a
thousand
gurus
what
is
true,
for
all
of
them
may
be
wrong
-
they
probably
are.
But
you have
to
find
out;
and
to
find
out
you have
to
destroy
every
authority
that
you have
created
within
yourself.
That
very
denial
brings
what
you may
call
disorder,
because
that
disorder
is
really
fear
which
arises
when
you begin
to
question
this
inward
authority
and
so
tear
down
the
house
that
one
has
built
up
through
centuries,
specially
in
this
country
which
is
in
a
state
od
deterioration.
37:38
You see
this
fact
of
authority
and
follow
it;
you say:
what
would
happen
if
there
were
no
inward
authority?
Probably
if
there
were
no
inward
authority
you would
be
disturbed
for
a
few
days,
but
soon
you would
find
another
authority
to
replace
the
old.
And
in
the
mean
time
there is
disorder,
and
you are
frightened
by
that
disorder.
|
|
38:17
Surely,
sirs,
you must
tear
down
everything
to
create,
you must
question
everything.
And
in
that
very
questioning
the
individual
comes
into
being;
otherwise,
we remain
the
mass.
And,
surely,
that
is
what
is
necessary
at
the
present
time
-
to
question
everything,
to
question
not
to
find
out
the
answer.
If
you question
with
a
motive,
it is
no
longer
questioning;
then
you are
merely
seeking
a
result.
But
if
you question
without
a
motive
-
which
is
quite
an
extraordinary
thing
to
do
-
then
your
mind
is
completely
capable
of
seeing
what
is
true.
|
|
39:38
So
it is
important,
is
it not?,
that
there
should
be
a
new
mind,
a
fresh
mind.
And
such
a
mind
is
not
possible,
if
it is
burdened
with
authority.
Authority
is
not
only
the
authority
of
the
guru,
the
authority
of
the
book,
the
authority
of
the
wife
and
the
husband
and
all
the
rest,
the
authority
or
the
will
to
dominate,
but
also
there is
a
much
deeper
significance
in
authority
which
is
experience.
Because,
most
of
us
live
by
experience,
experience
becomes
authority.
There is
the
experience
of
the
scientist
who
has
accumulated
for
centuries
knowledge
which
is
authority,
and
also
there is
the
experience
which
each
one
of
us
has
gathered
as
knowledge
and
that
becomes
our
authority
which
again
is
the
past:
the
authority
of
which
the
conscious
mind
is
aware
and
also
the
authority
which
is
the
accumulated
experience
in
the
unconscious.
41:56
Experience
is
the
reaction
to
challenge.
I
ask
you something.
The
very
asking
is
a
challenge
to
which
you respond,
and
the
responding
is
the
experiencing.
And
that
experiencing
is
the
result
of
your
previous
experiences
which
become
the
authority.
|
|
42:40
Please
see,
it is
quite
simple.
It may
sound
very
complicated,
but
it is
not.
All
experience
is
of
the
past.
And
any
response
of
experience
which
is
of
the
past
will
not
break
down
the
wall
of
the
past.
So
authority
of
any
kind,
inward
or
outward,
will
not
free
the
mind
from
the
past.
And
you can
never
be
a
master
of
the
future,
except
in
mechanical
things,
because
the
future
is
the
unknown.
But
we look
at
the
future,
the
tomorrow,
with
the
eyes
of
the
past,
and
therefore
we think
we can
control
it.
44:11
And
we do
control
it mechanically
-
tomorrow
you are
going
to
the
office,
tomorrow
you are
going
to
have
certain
results
in
your
activities
and
so
on.
Mechanically
you will
do
all
kinds
of
things;
therefore
you think
you are
the
master
of
the
future,
but
you are
not.
Psychologically
you are
not
the
master
of
the
future
which
is
tomorrow.
Because,
how
can
you be
the
master
of
something
which
you don't
know?
How
can
you be
the
master
of
a
mind
which
is
-
which
must
be
-
young,
fresh,
innocent?
So
when
you see
-
I
am
using
the
word
`see'
in
the
way
I
have
talked
about
seeing
-
that
certain
outward
forms
of
authority
are
necessary,
like
the
authority
of
the
engineer,
the
doctor,
the
Government,
the
law,
the
policeman,
but
every
other
form
of
authority
is
destructive
and
prevents
the
mind
from
being
free,
then
the
mind
can
be
free.
45:54
And
it is
only
the
free
mind
that
can
go
beyond.
|
|
46:03
So
we are
the
result
of
the
past.
We are
the
past.
And
any
projection
of
the
past
is
not
the
future,
except
mechanically,
except
in
time.
All
projections
into
the
future
-
such
as
`I
shall
be
this,
psychologically',
`I
shall
arrive',
or
`I
shall
find
the
truth'
-
are
born
of
the
past
and
therefore
are
productive
of
conflict.
|
|
47:10
Now,
if
you are
able
to
see
this
totally
-
that
is,
as
I
explained
seeing
something
totally,
with
your
mind,
with
your
heart,
with
your
senses,
with
your
eyes,
nose,
ears,
with
all
your
senses,
as
well
as
mentally,
emotionally,
completely;
seeing
something
without
contradiction,
without
effort
-
then
you will
find
that
the
past
can
be
broken
down
completely,
not
bit by
bit,
but
totally,
immediately,
because
seeing
prevents
the
gap
from
action.
There is
no
gap
between
seeing
and
acting.
I
hope
I
am
making
myself
clear.
|
|
48:49
You see,
sir,
it is
very
important,
to
remove
contradiction,
to
be
free
of
contradiction,
because
contradiction
brings
about
conflict.
I
am
talking
of
the
inward,
psychological
contradiction,
the
double
talk
of
the
politician
-
and
most
of
us
indulge
in
that
double
talk.
And
if
one
is
really
going
to
the
very
end
of
any
thought,
to
introduce
contradiction
prevents
further
journey,
you are
caught
in
contradiction.
So
what
we are
pointing
out
is
seeing
something
totally,
without
contradiction.
|
|
50:19
Sir,
to
see
that
you are
angry,
what
is
involved
in
that
seeing?
The
fact
is
that
you are
angry.
And
when
you see
that
fact,
without
denying
it,
without
justifying,
without
saying,
`It is
right'
or
`It is
wrong',
when
you are
just
aware
choicelessly
of
the
fact
that
you are
angry,
then
that
very
fact
that
you are
angry
will
bring
about
an
action
which
is
not
contradictory.
Then
you do
not
pretend,
or
persuade
yourself,
or
discipline
yourself
not
to
be
angry,
because
in
that
very
act
of
seeing
there is
no
contradiction.
51:32
And
this
fact
of
seeing
is
very
important
to
understand,
because
on
that
point
I
am
going
to
talk
all
the
time,
because
that
is
the
only
liberating
factor
-
the
act
of
seeing,
the
act
of
listening-;
then
you do
not
have
to
do
a
thing.
|
|
52:03
But
to
see
so
completely
you must
be
attentive,
and
attention
denies
contradiction.
You cannot
attend
if
you are
condemning.
You cannot
give
your
whole
attention
if
you are
trying
not
to
be
jealous.
It is
only
when
you are
completely
aware
that
you are
jealous
or
envious,
completely,
then
that
fact
brings
its
own
energy.
And
you need
tremendous
energy
to
have
this
attention.
And
the
act
of
seeing
is
attention.
I
am
not
talking
of
something
mystic,
something
of
a
special
process,
a
new
particular
way
of
thinking
-
all
that
is
absurdity.
53:26
We are
moving
from
fact
to
fact.
|
|
53:35
And
the
act
of
seeing
without
condemnation,
judgment,
evaluation,
without
the
word
which
is
thought;
the
act
of
looking,
observing
every
movement,
every
feeling
when
you pay
your
total
attention
to
everything
that
you see
and
feel
-
that
act
of
seeing
brings
about
a
new
mind,
a
fresh
mind.
That
fresh
mind
is
not
created
by
thought,
by
modern
education,
by
going
to
the
temple,
reading
the
Gita
or
the
Koran
or
the
Bible
everlastingly.
That
mind
comes
into
being
only
through
seeing;
and
to
see
you must
question
desperately.
55:06
And
the
very
act
of
seeing
is
very
destructive,
because
it destroys
the
society
in
which
you have
been
brought
up.
You are
no
longer
concerned
with
the
reformation
of
that
society.
You cannot
reform
society,
because
society
is
the
result
of
the
past.
And
if
you will
reform
it,
you are
still
in
the
past.
But
a
man
who
has
broken
down
the
past
completely
-
and
such
breaking
down
is
possible
-
he,
being
alone,
may
affect
society;
that
is
irrelevant.
|
|
56:15
So
what
is
important
and
essential
is
to
see
that
a
new
mind
is
necessary.
And
a
new
mind
cannot
be
brought
about
by
the
tricks
of
the
mind
-
which
is
thought.
The
new
mind
can
only
come
into
being
when
there is
a
questioning
of
the
society
in
which
we have
been
brought
up.
And
you cannot
question
if
you have
a
motive.
And
so
seeing
authority,
seeing
obedience
frees
the
mind
from
obedience.
After
all
what
prevents
you from
seeing
is
your
condemnation,
your
justification
which
is
the
past.
So
when
you look,
when
you see,
when
you listen,
without
condemnation,
you are
free
of
the
past.
57:45
You can
look,
and
to
so
look
you need
to
have
attention;
and
attention
is
the
essence
of
energy.
And
that
energy
only
comes
into
being
when
you are
constantly
looking,
watching,
observing,
seeing,
questioning.
|
|
58:28
So
out
of
this
extraordinary
listening
and
seeing,
the
mind
has
lost
its
mooring,
its
connection
with
the
past.
The
mind
has
its
anchor
in
the
past,
the
mind
is
the
past;
but
when
the
mind
gives
complete
attention
to
seeing,
it has
broken
down
the
past.
And
it is
only
such
a
fresh,
young,
innocent
mind
that
can
go
beyond
the
limitations
which
the
mind
has
placed
upon
itself.
It is
only
then
that
it is
possible
to
discover
for
oneself
as
an
individual
who
is
no
longer
a
part
of
society,
to
find
out
if
there is
or
if
there is
not
the
immeasurable.
|